August 3, 2011

Assume you must make a $1,000 bet on the outcome of the 2012 presidential election. You have to bet right now, and you have a $1,000 stake in getting this right, so this has nothing to do with whether you want him to win.

It's really hard. I'd almost decide to use a random number generator (the d8 or d20) and go odds and evens, if I really had to risk the money. (For some reason I like the shape of a d8.)

And it's not even about what I *want* to happen because it's sort of no-win. I don't want another 4 years of Obama. I also don't want the next year to be so bad that the power of the incumbency is overwhelmed and he loses.

Lose-lose.

But I think it's entirely likely that things will not get much better, that the economy will still suck, that revolution will bring discord instead of hope to even more countries in Africa and the Mid-East, that national pride and national optimism and rugged individualism will still be cast as the realm of the ignorant bitter clingers by those seeing their Hope and Change slipping away from them, and that everyone from Obama on down to the Huff-Po foot soldiers will double-down on the theory that doubling-down will save the day simply because their hearts are pure.

Unless there's a miracle in the economy, it won't matter how much street money there is. The people who might be expected to turn out otherwise, even if they don't vote for the other guy (or girl), may well stay home.

This Depression is going to hit the Demos' base the hardest. So don't count on 95% of blacks rushing out to vote for him.

And all this assumes no big swoon in the markets.

Or a Carteresque foreign policy disaster.

Or that QE3 (yes, it looks like they're going to do it) kicks off a big round of inflation.

I wouldn't be surprised if the unemployment rate goes back up to 10% due to the end of the stimulus & the recent cuts to state & the federal government.

2) US GDP is slowing, and the recent cuts will slow the economy about .4 in the next year.

3) U.S. economy is stalling out & headed for a double dip. In the six months leading up to the election, there is very small chance the US economy will be adding enough jobs to lower the unemployment rate.

Obama has been a massive disappointment. I thought we'd get liberal social policy but a relief from the "Greed is good" Republicans. Instead we get someone who gives Wall Street everything they wish and a social liberal.

One person that won't be excited is the rare clumber. He fucking loves Wisconsin. He meets all kinds of relatives, goes to all the family parties and there is land!

I can open my parents patio door and he can pinch a loaf in 30 seconds.

In Boston the first piece of land where he can pinch is like 10 minutes, or he just says fuck it, and pinches on the sidewalk.

He prefers pinching on grass though.

I don't even jerk off once a week in Wisconsin, that is how fucking ugly it is out here. I am like fuck it, I am just not horny.

In Boston I jerked off a good 2 or three times a day. I would walk 2 minutes to the fabulous and expensive rare cheese store and come back and have to jerky. Why you ask? Because along the way I saw like 50 hotties. I won't be going there now because I have realized that cheese is evil. Or go to any Sub Shop in places like Everett or Revere or Malden and you will see pumped up Vinny Bagadonuts. So hot yet so fucking dumb, which makes him even hotter.

I think I should be jerking off more and therefore Wisconsin has not been healthy for me.

I like Huntsman or Gary Johnson. Huntsman said he would have voted for the Boehner bill. This makes him willing to be serious in taking a stand and not grandstand. He speaks 2 dialects of Chinese, no mean feat, and has worked with the Chinese leadership. This is our most important foreign policy relationship. He has been governor in an effective state. Gary Johnson is refreshingly libertarian and fiscally conservative. Trying to make a mockery of either would give us an extra experience of Saturday Night Live courtesy of the Democrats.

Warren Harding was chosen by the stupid party ... and he got one term in the white house.

He was tall. He was handsome. He had a wonderful speaking voice. And, he was stupid.

He died of "food poisoning" ... Because the elite guard in the stupid party didn't want him running for president again.

And, that may turn out to be Obama's fate. He eats a vegetable. And, he dies at the table. So, instead of a primary challenger ... you'll get someone else up in the top slot.

It won't be Biden.

It won't be Michelle.

And, it won't be Hillary.

By the time November 2012 rolls around, the list of those who are running will be long. And, yes. Ralph Nader's name will be on the ballot. (He's in competition with Harold Stassen, who holds the Guinness book record, so far.)

So I was just checking in on National Review Online, and the anti-Walker people have ads attacking Sheila Harsdorf on the homepage. These are the ads that NRO has no control over, obvisouly, but it shows the money and power the unionists have. They have saturated Minnesota with anti-Harsdorf ads, and now have taken over National Review.

Clouds and tits and mountains and towns with "a river running through it".

Now get on with your fucking lifes and stop staring at the computer!

Thank you.

Titus, I like you. I really do, but you are the gigantic reason why I hate the blaise attitudes of people like you. If you want to assfuck and cocksuck yourself into oblivion while the rest of the country has to deal with the horseshit that people like you make us endure by saying utterly stupid shit like you said above, then please go somewhere else. You bring nothing to the table in this regard. Understand that politics affects all of us whether you engage in it or not.

I don't know if you are for real or a joke like a running gag, but what I do care about is when you try to minimize the seriousness of the political issues that affect us all. If you want a pair or more of your own tits, then go get them, play with them until you die, then shut the fuck up.

Given the euro crisis and the recent GDP figures, there is no way in hell the economy will get better enough soon enough to get businesses hiring enough by November 2012 to get unemployment lower than 8.5%.

Obama will not get re-elected with unemployment that high unless the Republicans nominate John Kerry or something.

GOP candidate to be named later, 344 votesThe artist formerly known as "The One" 194 votes

The popular vote margin will be close, within 4% (52-48), but Obama will get crushed in the electoral colllege, with a 15-20% swing in 2nd time voters away from Obama being the deciding factor.

Also, turnout will be significantly up from 2008, with Obama getting around 65M popular votes, only a slight dip from his 67M, but GOP will attract an additional 12M votes over the 58M received by McCain in 2008. That also means the GOP candidate will have some serious coattails, with the GOP gaining even more seats in the House, and picking up all the vulnerable Senate seats, plus they'll increase their grip on state legislatures from 27 in GOP control to 33.

And, that may turn out to be Obama's fate. He eats a vegetable. And, he dies at the table. So, instead of a primary challenger ... you'll get someone else up in the top slot.

Far more likely, I think, is that if anything dire happens it will go down more like this:

Around June or July of 2012 someone takes a few potshots at our beloved leader. Obama won't be not harmed; perhaps some bystanders will be hit. The would-be assassin will never be found, but the media immediately will blame the attempt on fascist RethugliKKKan Tea Partiers and the atmosphere of racism, hate, and violence that they have promoted. The steady drumbeat of condemnation in the media will continue up to the election, with contrary voices drowned out. Obama will win, and the gravely serious talking heads will tell us after the election that The Assassin Is Still Out There and that we still need to be on our guard for domestic terrorists ... and that draconian measures to maintain order and put down dissent are justified by the Commerce Clause and by Constitution's "ensure domestic tranquility" clause in the Preamble.

I'm not claiming any advance knowledge, and I don't want that sequence of events to occur ... but that scenario would enable Obama to win a second term and to continue to blame Republicans for all the evils in the world.

I do not have the answer to this difficult and troubling question regarding the future. What do I look like,The Amazing Kreskin over here? All I know is that there is something strange going on behind that blue flower of yours.

Next summer the President's EPA rules go into effect about Texas power stations. Other states too but Texas supplies twenty-five percent of the electric power in the entire country. Much of this power goes outside the state.

Next summer poor people will start to die in the heat because the President's EPA went on a political attack against some Republican states. The media will try to blame this on Bush or maybe the Koch brothers but only the Koz Kidz will believe that.

As usual, the prof's favorite little poofta emits clouds of noxious gas all over the thread. I am surprised he didn't reprise his "guess what I dug out of my ass" routine. His clouds shtick is every bit as annoying and sick as that previous thread hijack. But he's the favorite for a reason, right?

As for the topic, I would bet that Obama will be reelected, for reasons stated by some here. Stupid white people still think he is awesome, and there are millions of them.

I put "no" only because he's ruining the economy so terribly that I think it may be impossible for him to be reelected in 2012. Additionally he seems incapable of considering that his ideological economic plans do not work, so the chance of him changing course is small.

The economy will not recover until after the next President is nominated. The Senate will change hands and along with it a new Republican President will be sworn in in 2013.

President Obama failed miserably in his first year by trying to focus on a horrible stimulus that bailed out fiscally negligent states like Illinois and did not focus on the type of infrastructure improvements that would have drawn wider bipartisan support.

He transitioned to close his first year with Obamacare, perhaps the single worst bill ever signed into law from a cost/benefit perspective.

I went with yes, but its a close call. For yes, I think that the main thing is that the racial stakes are just too high. If America fails to reelect (or threatens to fail to reelect) the first black president, that will be proof of her continuing racism and everyone who votes against him will be racist. Don't think that it won't happen or that the fact that he was elected in the first place makes any difference at all. If it's tight or he loses, I expect that there will be some bloodshed.

But what it comes down to are swing states, and they are simply not in his favor, and not likely to change. So there's a strong argument for no there.

I wouldn't bet that much, and I've been a gambler all of my adult life. I would bet $100 on Obama simply because all the elite establishment will pull out all stops. The establishment has been weakened w/o a doubt by the internet. However, you should never underestimate a foe.

In sports it's more difficult to repeat, in politics it's much easier..you only have one opponent and the deck is stacked in your favor.

Does anyone know of any votes he's picked up? Everyone I know who's changed their mind about him has changed it for the negative. America doesn't like losing, and Obama's policies are making America lose.

So long as the GOP doesn't fuck up and nominate the nose-picking, shit-kicking, Jesus freak du jour -- as named by Hannity and Rush -- Obama loses.

So long as there is no economic miracle, Obama loses.

Right now, Ebola Virus beats Obama by 20%.

And unfortunately, we'll not see another African-American get so much as a sniff at the White House again in our lifetime: Obama has reinforced every negative stereotype about black men you could ever think of.

Not only that, he's also managed to associated his particular brand of "bend over and take this, Bitch" Leftard politics, forever, with a Racial Overtone.

Barack Obama was never Presidential material, and you morons who voted for him simply fell for the marketing campaign.

America doesn't like losing, and Obama's policies are making America lose.

To be as charitable as fucking possible, the best you could say is that America is loosing while he's in office, which is still the same net effect and completely discounts a great many thinks he's said and done to make it so.

AllenS:I live in one of the Philly suburbs that have trended DEM in the last 10 years. The Obama supporters have gotten strangely quiet in the last year or so. Perhaps, even they are shocked at his fish out of water act.

"You voted for Obama to prove you were not a racist, now vote for someone else to prove you are not an idiot"

That bumper sticker would lead to vandalism of any vehicle it was stuck to around here. Of course, around here, one still sees plenty of Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers - after all, John Edwards was our distinguished senator for a term, once long ago.

As long as welfare checks are still flowing Obama will have more than 50% of the votes in this area.

And Obama has not lost our hostess. There are millions more like her who are willing to vote for an anti-American bent on destruction of this nation. Viva la Obama!

I think No. With the global economy still teetering on the double-dip precipice, and no sign of job recovery on the horizon, he has an enormously steep hill to surmount.

Bush 41 had popular good will even when his numbers tanked, plus undeniable triumphs on the global stage, as well as 4 quarters of growth in 1992. But the perceived recession still undid him.

If Obama were vociferously to pivot to the center, based on the debt deal and the death of OBL, and back those goods with a motley set of centrist policies and perhaps new appointments (god, fire Holder already! and Tiny Tim!) then maybe, maybe, he could push himself to reelection.

But I don't think he has the Clintonian political chops to do that. Carter tried to act tough his final year, both globally and as a political fighter ("Kick his ass") but it wasn't convincing. And Obama doesn't seem willing even to try.

Yes. He will be reelected. Lyssa and ank echo the thoughts I would have posted. But I'll add another that I don't think I saw - fear.

Most people are "conservative" in the sense that they don't like change. Now, Little Black Jesus has changed ("fundamentally transformed," as he put it) the country, doing his best to increase and lock in the parasite vote. We know - and the 9-16% unemployed know - that the JEF is a disaster. But we're used to his disaster. Who's to say the GOP won't be worse? Especially with a steady MFM drumbeat of "don't change horses in midstream" coupled with the granny-starving-Medicare-slahsing-father-raping-terrorist slander, there will be a lot of ginned up uncertainty designed to frighten Democrats and squishy independents.

The fact that Obama is polling poorly in Michigan, which used to be a reliable blue state, does not bode well for him. Ohio, probably the key battleground state is leaning strongly Republican. Only 40% of Independents in Ohio favor a 2nd term for Obama. Pennsylvania is another state that like Michigan was once reliably Democrat. Obama is polling poorly in Pennsylvania. He's toast.

Who cares how liberals in NY, CA and IL or even WI will vote. The thing to look at is the states that GWB won in 2000 and 2004 and Obama won in 2008. If a republican can turn those states back to the GOP column then Obama is done. Will Obama win CO, NC, IN, VA, NV, OH, FL as well as the single district in NE again? Also, throw in reappportionment and that adds to the GOP cushion. The GOP simply has to regain territory that has been friendly to them in the past and was very friendly to them in the 2010 election. They don't have to take a single state that Bush didn't win in 2000 and 2004.

Fred4Pres said... "Sadly, with voters like Ann, it's his to lose. Sorry Ann, I like you a lot, but I do not care for your vote last time".

And just imagine Fred. The "law prof" Blogger Lady voted for an ineligible Candidate (Obama is not natural born Citizen, since he was born British of a British subject father), besides the fact of his nefarious associations w/ known Domestic Terrorists, Muslim Brotherhood, and Marxists. She was awfully trusting!!!No background info is available. Awfully trusting...

I have a plan to prevent Obama from completing any run for a second term, despite the fact that "legal" and "constitutional" scholars fail to acknowledge the fact of Obama's ineligibility. Even Conservatives, who only have to use the FACT of the real Constitutional question, not Conspiracy (as in the BC), to raise the mere QUESTION-- "Is one born a dual Citizen a natural born Citizen"?SCOTUS Precedent of Minor v. Happersett says NO. That is a fact, not a Conspiracy theory. All of Obama's signatures would become null and void when found Ineligible (including the Marxist SCOTUS appointments, the HC Bill, and the new buget "DEAL"), yet Idiot conservatives will not address that simple question, which is Obama's Kryptonite, which is the reason the useful idiots in the media (and Blogosphere)refuse to ask the question. Even his detractors are the contolled opposition, silenced by threats of violence in the streets, and being called "racists" and "terrorists". The Blogger lady should be ashamed.

McCain probably ran one of the worst campaigns I can remember. Even so, he was still in the running (even ahead at points) until the fiscal crisis occurred. Obama's indecision was misinterpreted as Presidential calm and resolve, while McCain's flurry of activity was interpreted in the worst light, and that put him over the top.

Obama won due to an unusual confluence of events: the resentment of 8 years of Bush & war, the economic crisis, racial guilt concerns, a relative 'blank slate' as far as a record, and a weak opposing candidate. That situation is not likely to occur again, and Obama's 'strengths' have been reversed against himself. His inablity to choose a course of action until after the situation is settled, unpresidential temperment and demenor, and economic policies have failed to so much as blunt the tide, let alone reverse course. The media shell surrounding him has begun to crack and splinter. Those who are pessimistic on Repub chances are either profoundly cynical, or enjoy drama. Obama is the one with the uphill battle, as it now stands.

1. 2008 was the "perfect storm" for Democrats. 8 years of Bush fatigue with a financial crisis and recession that Democrats placed squarely on his shoulders, an "historic" candidate, an extraordinarily weak GOP candidate, etc.

Even with all that Obama only got 52.9%. So that's his max total no matter what.

2. Voter ID has shifted 4 points in Republicans favor since 2008.

3. Independents disapprove of Obama 2-1.

4. Minorities have been hardest hit by the economy and Obama is no longer "historic." Turnout will be lower.

5. Unemployment among college graduates is low. Youth vote turnout will be depressed.

6. Liberal base disappointed/angry with him over a number of issues. Turnout will be depressed.

7. Conservatives will be "broken glass" voters ready to vote "Anybody But Obama."

8. Electability is high on GOP voter priorities. GOP will not nominate a fringe/protest candidate.

Fred4Pres said:Sadly, with voters like Ann, it's his to lose. Sorry Ann, I like you a lot, but I do not care for your vote last time.

And now Meade wishes he pulled the lever for Obama too.

Re: the question posed in the post, I say Barry will be reelected unless a Republican really emerges as a strong candidate, and even then it will be close. If the GOP nominates a McCain type, then Barry is back for 4 more. If one of the other GOP lesser-knowns campaigns well, it's a toss-up.

I'm not ready to declare the current field of GOP candidates as not up to the task. Gotta see how the campaigns go. Hopefully one of them steps up to the task. The best Presidents don't stroll into office with unanimous mandates and crushing electoral victories; they start out much more humbly and usually survive strong headwinds before proving themselves. Pretty much the opposite of Obama, who before proving anything was given the finest wings before flying way too close to the sun.

There are just SOOOO many ways an opponent can hammer this guy in a live debate and with effective advertising. It will take a GOP candidate who's more worried about winning and less worried about the appearance of being an "elder statesman".

Even the McCain camp, pre-Palin, occasionally managed a good hit on Obama, as with the "Celebrity" ad in the summer of '08.

Any GOP nominee is going to have to choke back the media's "outrage" and jump on that, and not stop.

Fortunately, it'll be much easier this time. The MSM may play as outraged as ever, but when we're three+ years into Obama's presidency, with all the miracles yet to happen, once a negative campaign starts hammering him it'll be hard to stop.

Especially since Obama has so little positives to gloat over, and blaming W. is getting very, very old.

That is the "Magical Power that Does Me No Good But Would Be Fun" that I would pick if given the choice. There are several prime bumper stickers that are crying out for alteration. Of course, if I actually printed out stickers and put them on cars I'd get caught, but if I could magically change "Women for Obama" to "Morons for Obama" it would be sweet.

The one I really want to change is "Don't like abortion? Don't have one!" to "Don't like slavery? Don't own one!" Since the car I see it on is driven by a white woman, it would be extra funny.

I work in a blue area of a red state, so it is a target-rich environment for such changes. *sigh*

It will cost our family a lot more than a grand if Obama is reelected.

His crummy economic policies cost us, we would estimate, about 50k-150k just this year. (This is based on contracts that were planned at the beginning of 2011/end of 2010 but pulled back when the economy didn't continue to rebound and everyone's budgets were contracted.)

Tim said... "Pretty much everyone who voted for McCain admitted it, but 11% of Obama voters must have had some kind of amnesia because they claimed they "didn't know" who they voted for."

Obama voters are stupid. All of them.

Um, no. This is wrong. Do you really think that Althouse is stupid?

The last election was a choice between two really bad candidates. I can't blame her for not voting for McCain. The guy is almost as big a dud as Zero.

Plus, consider this (hat tip D. Prager): Many people are smart, but are not wise. A lot of truth there. Many, many liberals/progressives are very smart in certain ways, but not wise or just ignorant in others.

Go read Pandagon. That's a lady that's very smart, yet wrong on 80-90% of all issues.

I bet the way my heart inclines, and then immediately regretted it. In a case like this, one *should* use it as a hedging opportunity, and bet that he wins. If he loses, I'm out $1000, but the end result, economically speaking, should more than compensate for the short-term loss. If he wins...

Simple risk assessment informs one that based on core values and experience, Obama was obviously the far riskier choice. Voting for Obama was surpassingly stupid; ergo, Obama voters ARE stupid, all of them (albeit, yes, not in all aspects of their lives - but that's not the issue here, is it?).

And what would that be, CL - that we'll be damned as racists for not reelecting Little Black Jesus, or that there will be bloodshed depending upon the results? Frankly, I think Lyssa hit the nail on the head.

Racists: "that dumbass Bush fucked up the country and you crackas still gave him another term, but when Obama tried to fix things, you wouldn't give him a chance!"

Bloodshed: I expect a lot of anger of Obama gets smoked in the general, but if the election is close - within single digits at best, a replay of Bush/Gore at worst - well, you're kidding yourself if you don't think the professional race pimps will scream "stolen election!" so hard their throats will bleed.

Carol - generally I try to skip over your posts, since they're the internet equivalent of fingernails on a blackboard, but Harding didn't choke to death on food, you blathering fool. He had a massive heart attack. Or his wife poisoned him, if you believe the conspiracy.

Number 2: You're more likely to believe bullshit. "Smart people believe weird things because they are skilled at defending beliefs they arrived at for non-smart reasons."

This explains a lot of Obama's support among the educated classes.

Personally, I hope he loses, but I wouldn't be a grand on it, even if I had a grand to spare. (That whole foreclosure thing ...) My husband's business is programming six figure home automation systems in seven figure houses; guess who doesn't want to spend that kind of money with the class warfare talk going around?

Freeman: His crummy economic policies cost us, we would estimate, about 50k-150k just this year. (This is based on contracts that were planned at the beginning of 2011/end of 2010 but pulled back when the economy didn't continue to rebound and everyone's budgets were contracted.)

Its the uncertainty. Businesses don't want to hire or risk capital for expansion because its almost as if Team Obama is at war with small businesses.

Say what you will about McCain being Obama-lite, but we'd be going through an actual recovery by now if he was in office.

I didn't vote because I was a bit afraid that if I did, it would jinx the election in Obama's favor. Something like that - a political junkie version of Murphy's Law.

I don't see the Presidency being as useful to Obama as it has been to previous Presidents. Partially, this is, I think, a trend - GWB shouldn't have had as hard a time against Kerry as he did.

But, I also don't think that Obama does Presidential all that well. He seems a bit gravitas-impaired. What would an Obama Rose Garden campaign look like? Probably tearing it up to put in another basketball court. Something like that. Or, maybe Michelle needs to plant more vegis.

On the other hand, I expect his campaign to collect and spend hundreds of billions of dollars over that of his Republican challenger. Remember his campaign turning off requiring of identification for credit cards last time? Worked like a dream - I had thought that much of that was foreign money (some probably was), but according to Republican insiders I saw last week in D.C., a lot of it was union money - it was so bad that entire NFL rosters were contributing the legal max, as were all the Disney characters.

It needed to be investigated, and wasn't. Holder, the most corrupt AG in our lifetimes, was appointed to run Justice, and the Dems won both Houses of Congress in the same election (as they had 2 years before).

And, of course, the media is still in his corner, though more are realizing it every year, and therefore discounting anything that comes out of the broadcast news, CNN, PMSNBC, and the papers. This help was significant enough that Obama was never vetted, and a false picture of both candidates was foisted on the public in 2008.

On the flip side, there is the economy, which isn't going anywhere, or at least not quickly enough to not hurt Obama. He can cry that it was Bush's fault (no - it was the Dems, led by Dodd and Frank).

And, then there is scandal. This is the most crooked Administration of our lifetimes, and Justice is run by a crooked AG. We thought that with the Republicans taking over the House, we would at least see investigations of the NBP case. But, Lamar Smith is a horridly corrupt RINO, so nothing has happened there.

But the Fast and Furious investigation is gathering steam. Right now, it looks like it probably goes all the way up to AG Holder. Justice is stonewalling as fast as they can, but a surprising number of the agents involved have come forward, as has the heat of BATF.

We aren't talking one smoking gun here, but rather, several thousand of them, used to deal major death and mayhem in Mexico. Besides the one or two U.S. agents killed, it appears that other Americans have been killed by guns that either didn't go south, or that have come back north across the border.

Realistically, this is the biggest scandal of the last 50 years. You wouldn't know it, because of the MSM protecting Obama so zealously. But the word is getting out, and at some point, I think that they will be required to report on it, and do so somewhat accurately. And, the longer the MSM covers and stalls here, the more the scandal will shift towards election day.

BTW - One of Blogger's biggest problems for me is losing posts. I just had a feeling that if I didn't save this post, Blogger would lose it, since I mentioned Murphy. Well, it did, but I had saved it. For once.

I voted "Yes" for basically the same reasons as Madison Man and Shouting Thomas. People who are net recipients of government aid outnumber the payers and will not vote for any one, or any party, that will endanger their "entitlements." (Yes, I am including recipients of Social Security and Medicare in my sweeping pronouncement.)

On a semi-related topic, Ann, please consider banning Titus. He adds nothing to the discussion and his rants are extremely gross.

art.the.nerd - welcome to the land of free speech, where all the shit that Titus drops is blessed by the hostess. Well, she did delete his "guess what I dug out of my rectum posts" on one thread - but generally, he is her favorite.

Really, you can skip over his shallow, self-absorbed comments, Carol Herman's ramblings about how well she knew Coolidge, and all of my profanity-laced comments - just look for the name at the beginning of the comment then skip over the ones that need skipping.

As it stands right now, union money is going to play a fanatical role in getting this intellectual retard elected again. They know they don't like his current stances in dealing with their issues, but they will will be damned if they let a (conservative) republican in as president because then they will see how poorly they will fare afterwards. They do not want to crash and burn. The money you see floating Urkles way to the tune of a billion+ is union money. Period. End of story.

The whisper campaign against Perry is already starting from the leftard brigade; "Oh, we can't elect another Texan!!!" "oh, we can't have Bush 3 again!!!" and on and on. All Perry has to do is show how Texas has been doing compared to California, New York, New Jersey, Florida, Washington and all of the other states that hold major urban lefard enclaves and you will see what happens.

Let's hope people have had enough of the liberals control. Since 2006 the Dems have had control of at least 2/3 of the gov and look what has happened whent from 5% unemployed to 9% they blame Bush but I do not see how that will work since the economy took a shit after they took charge and it has not got any better. Hope everyone remebers this. Oh and by the way look who realy does more for the rich. Bailout money to B Of A AGI GMC seems like the Dems like the big guys the best